Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 12-06-2017, 06:35 PM
 
18,986 posts, read 9,022,261 times
Reputation: 14688

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by steven_h View Post
You hit all the pseudo-talking points based on "ifs" as IF the fantasy is fact.

Fact: a woman can't get pregnant without a man (this is what you focus on)

Fact: a man can't make a woman pregnant without her participation.


Pregnancy is a two-party event. Just as deciding on an abortion should be, but rarely is.

Stop making it sound like only one side is to blame.
But only one side ends up pregnant. But I'll tell you what, when you find yourself pregnant, steven, we'll revisit this.

 
Old 12-06-2017, 06:41 PM
 
18,339 posts, read 18,947,943 times
Reputation: 15647
Quote:
Originally Posted by steven_h View Post
THAT was one of the dumbest statements I've ever heard! There is no way to reverse the results of careless sex. Abortion is the only solution some, mostly poor and young, people have. It also tears a womans body apart (sometimes to death) and causes real problems later in life for a very high percentage of them. That's something no Planned Parenthood counselor ever talks about.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...49386715001589

People have sex most of the time for pleasure not for pregnancy. Abstinence is not an option for most people. Birth control does fail, people are not perfect. You don’t want “poor and young people “ to have abortions but are you ok with them being parents? Abortion is safer than child birth which does “tears a woman’s body apart” . No abortion does not cause problems later on life for a high percentage of women later in life.
 
Old 12-06-2017, 10:34 PM
 
23,655 posts, read 17,453,968 times
Reputation: 7471
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAMS14 View Post
What is wrong with forcing women to give birth against their will? Well, nothing, I suppose, if one wants to live in a fundamentalist theocracy, which you obviously would like very much. I bet you thought The Handmaid's Tale was a beautiful love story.
The handmaids tale was laughable I could only watch one episode.
 
Old 12-06-2017, 10:44 PM
 
23,655 posts, read 17,453,968 times
Reputation: 7471
Rachel's Vineyard

Help for post abortive women and men plus family members. Abortion affects more then just the woman so that puts the, "it's my body so it doesn't matter to anyone else" lie in the spotlight.

There is help out there if you are suffering.
 
Old 12-07-2017, 04:16 AM
 
3,636 posts, read 3,414,573 times
Reputation: 4324
Quote:
Originally Posted by branDcalf View Post
The terror of their babies scream to the cosmos.
Hardly. When people choose abortion - as opposed to abortions performed for medical requirements - they almost entirely do so in the first 16 weeks of gestation. In fact the vast vast majority of them are performed in or before week 12.

At this point there is no a shred of sentience and consciousness active in the fetus. There is no terror / fear / pain / experience in the fetus _at all_. The "screams" are not just unheard - they are not even there.

However this is not a thread about abortion per se - but the economics of a model of providing abortion services that is profit based. Giving abortion providers any vested interest in performing abortions for profit or to quote is indeed a horrific model that needs to be questioned deeply.

Quote:
Originally Posted by janelle144 View Post
If only men would step up and act like men when the woman they are with gets pregnant there would be less abortions.
That is a vast generalisation that does not map onto the reality of the _vast_ diversity of reasons women seek abortions.

Sure there are _many_ cases where the woman might not choose abortion if the man who made them pregnant did not jump ship. However there are _many_ cases where the women choose it _even with_ their man standing with them every step of the way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by OnOurWayHome View Post
Cons say they want fewer abortions yet are all about restricting women's access to birth control.

Dems actually do want fewer abortions so we support access to and financial help for birth control.
Yes I think the political partisan nature of US conversation - which is seeping into the rest of the world unfortunately - stops us finding common ground in such conversations. And we really need to find common ground in all political conversation.

The common ground here is that the average citizen on _both_ sides of the abortion debate wants there to be less abortion. Being pro-choice on abortion does not mean wanting there to be more abortions. It means wanting there to be more choice.

I think if people on all sides of partisan politics could find the common ground there - then the conversation will split from merely being about pro-choice or not. It would split into _both_ sides sitting down and saying "How do we reduce the number of women who seek to make that choice - regardless of whether we believe they should have that choice or not".

Quote:
Originally Posted by YourWakeUpCall View Post
Therefore, except in extremely rare cases like rape, the state of being pregnant is entirely voluntary. In other words, a choice. Choices come with consequences. If you're not willing to accept the consequences, make a different choice.
Similarly then the state of being injured in - say - sport is entirely voluntary. People go into sport knowing they could be injured. What we do however is not stand over their injured body saying "You chose this". Rather what we do is stand with them saying "Your choices lead to consequences and here are the options you have now".

Many people have sex - just like many people play sport. And many people having sex take all the precautions they can to avoid pregnancy. Just like people in sport often wear protective gear. But in both cases the consequences they are protecting against _still happen_ despite their precautions.

In pregnancy - just like in sport - I see no reason to moral high horse them to death beating them with the results of their choices. Especially if you do not know the meaning of words like "murder" and insist on using them incorrectly.

You also appear not to understand the meaning of "accepting the consequences". Accepting a consequence does not mean sitting there and simply letting the consequence control your life. Accepting a consequence - that is to say taking responsibility for the results of ones actions - involves accepting the consequence has happened and take mature informed and thought out choices about how to move forward in the light of that. And abortion is an _option_ that can and should be on the table for such scenarios.

Quote:
Originally Posted by steven_h View Post
THAT was one of the dumbest statements I've ever heard! There is no way to reverse the results of careless sex.
Why are you assuming it is "careless sex". Many people take precautions - sometimes even 2 or 3 at the same time. And they still end up pregnant. Such people were not "careless". Nor were women who were raped or misled by false claims about sex or sexual ignorance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by steven_h View Post
Abortion is the only solution some, mostly poor and young, people have. It also tears a womans body apart (sometimes to death) and causes real problems later in life for a very high percentage of them. That's something no Planned Parenthood counselor ever talks about.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...49386715001589
Did you read your own link there at all? You do realise it supports the exact opposite position than the one you are espousing? Read the conclusion of the paper for example which states "This study describes the physical health experiences of women after birth and abortion. Our results reinforce the existing data on the safety of induced abortion when compared with childbirth" - which is hardly talking about abortion tearing bodies apart and causing real problems later in life.

Also when you claim abortion "tears a womans body apart" what _are_ you talking about exactly? What kind of abortions? At what stages? What procedures? You do know there is not just one "thing" called abortion right? There are a whole host of methods and procedures available depending on things like what stage of pregnancy the woman is at when she has that abortion.
 
Old 12-07-2017, 05:40 AM
 
58,726 posts, read 26,998,537 times
Reputation: 14163
Quote:
Originally Posted by reed067 View Post
When the men here who want to point their fingers at any woman have the ability to give birth then you can say whatever you want. Until then it's THIER body NOT yours.
"THIER body NOT yours"

Sorry to disagree with you.

If a woman engages in consensual sex and gets pregnant the MAN is an EQUAL partner in the creation of the baby.

If she does NOT want to get pregnant she has MULTIPLE choices to make BEFORE she engages in sex.

It is called TAKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR OWN ACTIONS.

The are MANY things in today's America that goes against "it's my body and I can do anything I want with it.

Suicide, seat belt laws, helmet laws etc. come to mind.
 
Old 12-07-2017, 05:42 AM
 
58,726 posts, read 26,998,537 times
Reputation: 14163
Quote:
Originally Posted by janelle144 View Post
If only men would step up and act like men when the woman they are with gets pregnant there would be less abortions.
If women did NOT engage in sex, they would NOT get pregnant.

"It takes 2 to Tango"!
 
Old 12-07-2017, 05:44 AM
 
58,726 posts, read 26,998,537 times
Reputation: 14163
Quote:
Originally Posted by janelle144 View Post
If only men would step up and act like men when the woman they are with gets pregnant there would be less abortions.
If women did NOT engage in sex, they would NOT get pregnant in the first place, especially with men NOT their husbands, and there would be LESS ABORTIONS.

"It takes 2 to Tango"!
 
Old 12-07-2017, 05:45 AM
 
3,221 posts, read 1,725,662 times
Reputation: 2197
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar View Post
So what you are saying is...that if only men acted right somehow women would be forced to give birth? uh huh.

Want to fix the problem? I mean REALLY get those numbers WAY down?

1. mandatory sex ed
2. a basic income supporting children
3. higher wages
4. free child care

etc etc.

If you folks are truly horrified by this, support things that would make abortion not such a obvious preferred choice for folks. Instead we give tax breaks to billionaires, while increasing the burden on the poor-of course they're going to abort. They cant afford a child!
No no, they don't give a **** about the baby once it's born. This Abby Johnson was discredited years ago, she quit because she watched one abortion or something if I recall, then would go on to tell stories full of holes.

Planned Parenthood is a great organization. Providing abortion services is an incredibly small percentage of what they do.
 
Old 12-07-2017, 06:17 AM
 
3,636 posts, read 3,414,573 times
Reputation: 4324
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough View Post
If a woman engages in consensual sex and gets pregnant the MAN is an EQUAL partner in the creation of the baby.
An equal part in the _conception_ of the baby sure. I am not sure that makes him an equal part in the entire process that then follows. Some men take zero part in anything that happens after that point/moment for example.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough View Post
If she does NOT want to get pregnant she has MULTIPLE choices to make BEFORE she engages in sex. It is called TAKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR OWN ACTIONS.
And again a woman - and the man with her - can take all the right choices before engaging in sex and still end up pregnant against her desire to be.

Taking responsibility for your actions means sitting down and accepting the consequence has occurred - and then sitting down to take mature informed and thought out choices about how to move forward in the light of that.

_Our_ responsibility as a society is to decide what options and choices such a woman should - or should not be - offered and why. Not to stand over them beating them with the consequence itself and berating them with moral high horse nonsense about who's fault it all is.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top